Multiple-Choice Mitt isn’t giving the president any credit for the downfall of Moammar Gaddafi. This is in spite of the fact that Romney lost a friend on Pam Am Flight 103, and despite him having criticized Obama for doing too little (and also too much) to take Gaddafi down. There hasn’t been any substance to any of the five positions Romney has taken on the war in Libya. I think this is pretty accurate:
Writing in the American Conservative magazine, Daniel Larison observed at the time ”Romney seems unable to stake out a foreign policy position until after the Republican consensus has formed, and he then adapts himself to whatever that consensus happens to be…This does save him from the acrobatics required to maintain an anti-Obama position when Obama switches from restraint to starting a war, but it is just another reminder that Romney doesn’t hold foreign policy positions so much as he mimics those who do….For someone who is so fond of mocking Obama’s leadership or lack thereof, it is revealing that when Romney has to stake out a position one way or the other on a controversial question he is unable to show any leadership at all.”
I have some major concerns about Obama’s foreign policy and his record on civil liberties. But I at least can articulate what I think without waiting to hear what progressives are going to say.
